If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

There is also the "hygiene" issue. Right now regulations state that women are required to come in from the field every three days for female hygiene. Is that going to change as well? Again it will be impossible to build unit cohesion...especially when your'e in a hostile area when one or more members of the team are deserting you every three days to get a shower and clean up when you're still stuck in a fox hole smelling like the local goat herd freezing your backside off.

There is also the "hygiene" issue. Right now regulations state that women are required to come in from the field every three days for female hygiene. Is that going to change as well? Again it will be impossible to build unit cohesion...especially when your'e in a hostile area when one or more members of the team are deserting you every three days to get a shower and clean up when you're still stuck in a fox hole smelling like the local goat herd freezing your backside off.

I wish I could have a dollar for every so called charge of sexual harassment and rape(90% will be false so they can get out of combat/service) that will come down the pipe, then i could retire a rich man.

The media is lapping this all up in anticipation of the Conservative response to this.

Anderson Cooper's exact words the other day were "Is Obama planning to annihilate the Republican party?" His guest answered "he's succeeding."

I can't say I agree.

One would think that a president who rules by executive order and appears to be consolidating his power for one-party rule would be of more concern to the media.

Originally Posted by Elspeth

Wait til the draft. Now, young women won't have the option of avoiding a situation that has a higher probability of rape than anything stateside (outside of gang neighborhoods).

Rape is only bad when Republicans talk about it. When we point out that sexual assault stats in the armed forces are resisting everything that we do to prevent them, we're told that we must find a way, but the obvious way, separation of the sexes, isn't permissible, and those who suggest or practice it (like the Marines) are denigrated as extremists.

Originally Posted by txradioguy

There is also the "hygiene" issue. Right now regulations state that women are required to come in from the field every three days for female hygiene. Is that going to change as well? Again it will be impossible to build unit cohesion...especially when your'e in a hostile area when one or more members of the team are deserting you every three days to get a shower and clean up when you're still stuck in a fox hole smelling like the local goat herd freezing your backside off.

They'll just rotate the whole unit back. After all, the war isn't going anywhere, is it? And we practice relief-in-place operations, so why not do it more often? The increased costs in lives, materiale, time and everything else is negligible next to the rights of women, especially that one career officer who may make it up to the Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. What's losing a war or two if it gains us that?

They'll just rotate the whole unit back. After all, the war isn't going anywhere, is it? And we practice relief-in-place operations, so why not do it more often? The increased costs in lives, materiale, time and everything else is negligible next to the rights of women, especially that one career officer who may make it up to the Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. What's losing a war or two if it gains us that?

They'll just rotate the whole unit back. After all, the war isn't going anywhere, is it? And we practice relief-in-place operations, so why not do it more often? The increased costs in lives, materiale, time and everything else is negligible next to the rights of women, especially that one career officer who may make it up to the Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. What's losing a war or two if it gains us that?

At which point the Liberals will have what they want. A military that can barely protect it's own borders...incapable of projecting power aroundthe globe much less around the block.

They'll just rotate the whole unit back. After all, the war isn't going anywhere, is it? And we practice relief-in-place operations, so why not do it more often? The increased costs in lives, materiel, time and everything else is negligible next to the rights of women, especially that one career officer who may make it up to the Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. What's losing a war or two if it gains us that?

Having been through a couple of unit GWOT rotations from different perspectives, I often wondered if there was a more expensive, logistic-intensive, fraud-laden, and generally wasteful way of deploying military units just for the single 'Advantage' of as many different units as humanly possible getting combat patches and a shot at unit citations. Congratulations, I think you may have found one.

At which point the Liberals will have what they want. A military that can barely protect it's own borders...incapable of projecting power aroundthe globe much less around the block.

I'm sure that Rome had people who felt the same way about the legions, right up to the Visigoth invasion, when they demanded to know who was going to protect them.

Originally Posted by DumbAss Tanker

Having been through a couple of unit GWOT rotations from different perspectives, I often wondered if there was a more expensive, logistic-intensive, fraud-laden, and generally wasteful way of deploying military units just for the single 'Advantage' of as many different units as humanly possible getting combat patches and a shot at unit citations. Congratulations, I think you may have found one.

So long as they are held to the same physical standards, not a reduced standard, and can complete the mission I have no problem with this. But we will have to see a little bit of this in motion before a decision can be made permanent. And I don't see sexual harrasment, rape, or "pregnancy to avoid service" rising. Some of you are just ignorant, sexist, assholes.

Now, if it fails, then it fails and we know what our limits are as a military. It really isn't the worst thing in the world.

“A creative man is motivated by the desire to achieve, not by the desire to beat others.” – Ayn Rand

So long as they are held to the same physical standards, not a reduced standard, and can complete the mission I have no problem with this. But we will have to see a little bit of this in motion before a decision can be made permanent. And I don't see sexual harrasment, rape, or "pregnancy to avoid service" rising. Some of you are just ignorant, sexist, assholes.

Now, if it fails, then it fails and we know what our limits are as a military. It really isn't the worst thing in the world.

Go look at the current scoring chart for the APFT...do you honestly think the standards are going to remain the same or in any way "fair"?

Not trying to be mean or snarky...just telling to to think about what you know about the military and how things work and then ask yourself that question.

Go look at the current scoring chart for the APFT...do you honestly think the standards are going to remain the same or in any way "fair"?

Not trying to be mean or snarky...just telling to to think about what you know about the military and how things work and then ask yourself that question.

Many Libertarians like liberals want to see the dismantling of the military, unlike most liberals they won't tell you that that is their intent.

Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil;Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness;Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!21 Woe to those who are wise in their own eyesAnd clever in their own sight! Isaiah 5:20-21 NASB